Witnesses in Barmore shooting found guilty of contempt of court

Wednesday

Mar 21, 2012 at 12:01 AMMar 21, 2012 at 8:22 PM

ROCKFORD — Chief Judge Joseph McGraw found Sheila and Marissa Brown in criminal contempt of court today and fined them $500 each for disregarding his order in December 2009 to testify to a Winnebago County grand jury.

Jeff Kolkey

ROCKFORD — Chief Judge Joseph McGraw found Sheila and Marissa Brown in criminal contempt of court today and fined them $500 each for disregarding his order in December 2009 to testify to a Winnebago County grand jury.

Sheila Brown and her daughter, Marissa, then 17, were witnesses in August 2009 to the fatal shooting of Mark Anthony Barmore during an altercation with police. They were given less than a week’s notice of their scheduled grand jury testimony two days before Christmas.

“They knew what they had to do and when they had to do it,” McGraw said as he rendered his verdict. “Mrs. Brown and Ms. Brown knew what was required and did not obey.”

McGraw said he would have sentenced the Browns to jail if Sheila Brown had not testified that they had been following the poor advice of their lawyer, Sam Adam Jr.

With long-standing plans to visit family and participate in religious services in Mississippi for Christmas, the Browns asked McGraw to grant them a continuance until after the trip.

McGraw said it was a tough call but ruled that the trip was not urgent and did not trump their duty and the community interest to testify as scheduled Dec. 23, 2009.

He denied their request for a continuance.

Sheila Brown testified that Adam advised her that his appeal of McGraw’s decision would circumvent McGraw’s jurisdiction. Brown testified she was advised the appeal would allow them to go on the planned trip and repeatedly asked Adam if he was sure about it.

“I didn’t want to do anything wrong,” Brown said. “If the judge wanted me here, I wanted to be here.”

Adam testified that his advice was based on his research of case law and consultations with other attorneys including his father, Sam Adam Sr., who represented the Browns during today’s trial.

But McGraw said the court’s ability to compel the presence of witnesses is “not a gray area” and is critical to the interest of justice. His ruling should have been the “beginning, middle and end of it.”

The question came down to whether the Browns willfully disobeyed to hinder or obstruct the court. Because they were following Adam Jr.’s advice, the Browns argued, they should be found not guilty. An appellate court has since ruled McGraw’s denial of a continuance wasn’t appealable.

Their “willfulness was patent and obvious,” McGraw said. He also sharply reprimanded Adam Jr., who he said should have requested a stay if he was going to appeal.

“I cannot countenance what you have done here,” McGraw told Adam Jr. “Court orders are to be respected and followed. You took it upon yourself to take on the role of judge.”

Illinois law allows a judge to sentence someone for contempt to six months in jail and a $500 fine without a jury.

McGraw said he plans to refer Adam Jr. to the Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission, which operates under the authority of the Illinois Supreme Court, for an investigation of his advice to the Browns.

Ultimately, the 2009 grand jury hearing was held without the Browns. Then-Rockford police officers Stan North and Oda Poole were found justified in their use of deadly force.

The Browns had told investigators that Barmore, 23, fled from police and hid in a boiler room in the basement day care of Kingdom Authority International Ministries.

The Browns said Barmore did not struggle with officers before he was fatally shot in front of children in the day care. But officials said their statements conflicted with the physical evidence and the officers’ testimony.

McGraw said the Browns’ testimony could have been critical to the deliberations of the grand jury.

Poole and North were in the courtroom today. They said because of continuing federal civil cases they were limited in their comments. But Poole said after more than two years he wanted to hear why the Browns never showed for the grand jury hearing, and North said he wanted to hear McGraw’s ruling.

Adam Sr. said a decision has not been made whether the Browns will appeal McGraw’s verdict. Adam Sr. said he disagreed with McGraw on the verdict and with the admonition of his son, who “did everything he could on behalf of his client” and questioned whether the law was clear on the matter.

“I appreciate the court’s leniency, but I think the judge was wrong,” Adam Sr. said. “I personally feel he was wrong, but it was a considered sentence, and I appreciate that.”